German gets 5 years for denying Holocaust

[Sisyphus]

No it really is thought crime. And thought crime isn't a small problem. When you drag an author out of a book signing and throw him in jail for 5 years it's not the same as outlawing burning a cross on someone's front porch. Even though both events might express the same hateful beliefs. A book no matter how rehensible should never be outlawed or burned. A though or words should not be outlawed and the owner of those words jailed. To repress objectionable speach is only to shelter it from reason and allow those beliefs to fester and spread.

That's why we let the Klan march through the streets in Washington DC whenever they apply for a permit. Not because we agree with their ideas. But because to outlaw those morons would only help them recruit. Let everybody hear their ideas and let everybody hear the objections to their ideas.

I'll try again. The purpose (and use) of this law is not about arresting some old academic because of not liking his interpretation of history. It's not about burning books or suppressing free thought. The key issue is intent. The deniers write inflamatory material and enable and promote the cause of violent fascist and neo-Nazi movements.

Would you allow any fundamentalist cleric living in the US preach in favor of suicide bombings?

[Midnight Judges]

I don't agree. The connection is too removed.

If the guy was making a speech in front of a big crowd of neo-Nazis with the goal of getting them to burn the synagogue down the street, you would be correct, because that would be incitement to violence.

What you are describing is the direct, predictoble ( :doh: ) result of holocaust denying.

[rincewind]

I'd like to see what the 14 charges actually were. I dont think denying the holocaust deserves JAIL (though i have no sympathy for this douche), i do think "inciting hatred" probably does. Thats what he was charged with, "inciting hatred."

The article needs to be more specific.

Exactly. If you can prove he was trying to incite hate and riots, fine lock him up. If you are arresting people simply for denying the holocaust happened, that's bad mojo. Sounds a little bit like this:

[Air Force Cane]

good point about the Klan burning crosses. Why is that illegal then? Does that mean we have no First Amendment rights?

In Germany there are all kinds of laws against Neo-Nazism.

And David Irving is a crackpot apologist for Adolf Hitler. NO real historian disputes that 6 million Jews were murdered. There have been literally thousands of books on the Holocaust dealing with the numbers and machinery of Nazism.

It is probably illegal for this very reason that some on here are doubting the Holocaust. It is not like someone pulled 6 million out of thin air- the Nazis kept RECORDS of many of those murdered.

[Sisyphus]

I don't agree. The connection is too removed.

If the guy was making a speech in front of a big crowd of neo-Nazis with the goal of getting them to burn the synagogue down the street, you would be correct, because that would be incitement to violence.

Otherwise, you are just taking the Red China approach to free speech - Speech is free as long as the government doesn't disagree with the message.

I don't see the 'removal' of the connection. He published and mass mailed literature to Germany intended to incite the masses to violence. He even mass-mailed the German parliament. He can't use the excuse (like anti-semitic actors, racist comedians or homophobic NBA players ) that he mis-spoke once. His intent over many years through numerous writings was to spread lies with the intent of both intimidating one section of the population, and inciting another.

[herrmag]

How can ANYONE deny the Holocaust when the very country that commited the atrocities admits to it?

[zoony]

It is probably illegal for this very reason that some on here are doubting the Holocaust. It is not like someone pulled 6 million out of thin air- the Nazis kept RECORDS of many of those murdered.

60 minutes had a great story a few weeks back about this. They recently uncovered some more records, and were actually able to match the records up with holocaust survivors living in the US.

[zoony]

How can ANYONE deny the Holocaust when the very country that commited the atrocities admits to it?

It's a lot like the 9-11 conspiracy dorks.

.....

[Midnight Judges]

How can ANYONE deny the Holocaust when the very country that commited the atrocities admits to it?

Never underestimate the power of denial. Hell, a quarter of our own population still believes Iraq had stockpiles of WMD even though we've been there for 4 years and found jack squat and even President Bush admits he was wrong.

[JMS]

...but the Klan never took over the country and committed genocide leading to one of the most bloody wars in the history of the world. If they had, our laws against them would certainly reflect it. This guy is deliberately laying down the foundation for future violence in a society that has been proven susceptable. I do believe speech is a sacred right, but so is life, and in this most extreme of circumstances, a little balance is in order.

I won't debate equivelence with the Nazi's or the Klan, I didn't introduce that comparison, I just investigated it.

It is exactly because of their objectionable speach that they should be allowed to express themselves. "Balance" you desire can not be imposed by the government. People if free to decide for themselves will mostly decide correctly eventually. That's what our government is based upon. Not being able to fool all of the people all of the time. To outlaw their speech doesn't remove the ideas or irradicate the thoughts. That can only be done by fully exposing their ideas and evidence.

Frankly I'm all for these holocost deniers. If the great danger we face from the holocost is forgetting what happenned, what could be better than a public debate every few years when these guys come up with new arguments. Let's put them on the tonight show with Jay Leno and give them a half hour to present their scholarly evidence. Then follow it up with Ellie Wizel and Alan Dershowitz, ... Maybe read into evidence the eyewitness testomoney of General Eisenhower and Patton too. Be fair to and alow them to fully express and investigate their case, that will give them all the rope they need to end the discussion, until the next time...

John Stewart would be a good presenter too....

[JMS]

How can ANYONE deny the Holocaust when the very country that commited the atrocities admits to it?

and outlaws any substative debate on the subject.. and jails anyone who puts forward a counter argument.. I think that's how they can deny it.

[JMS]

I'll try again. The purpose (and use) of this law is not about arresting some old academic because of not liking his interpretation of history. It's not about burning books or suppressing free thought. The key issue is intent. The deniers write inflamatory material and enable and promote the cause of violent fascist and neo-Nazi movements.

Would you allow any fundamentalist cleric living in the US preach in favor of suicide bombings?

You're wrong here. Whatever you think the intention is, the implementation is exactly as you describe. Jailing people for writting books. Jailing people at book signings. Jailing people in the middle of giving speaches.

I won't say that the jailed are scholars in anything but the loosest sense of the word. But they are non violent people putting forth offensive objectionable non violent thought..

[Predicto]

I don't see the 'removal' of the connection. He published and mass mailed literature to Germany intended to incite the masses to violence. He even mass-mailed the German parliament. He can't use the excuse (like anti-semitic actors, racist comedians or homophobic NBA players ) that he mis-spoke once. His intent over many years through numerous writings was to spread lies with the intent of both intimidating one section of the population, and inciting another.

Under American law, there is a distinction on whether speech may be restricted that is based on time, place and manner concerns. In other words, it is not illegal to say the word "fire" but it is illegal to yell "FIRE" in a crowded theatre.

Sometimes it is a hard line to draw exactly, but I know that writing bad stuff and mass mailing it is too removed from actual and specific incitement to violence to qualify under our laws. And I think that is a good approach, due to the overriding value of free speech.

[Sisyphus]

and outlaws any substative debate on the subject.. and jails anyone who puts forward a counter argument.. I think that's how they can deny it.

This is not the intent of the law or how it is prosecuted.

Those prosecuted for Holocaust Denial are not interested in an academic argument about the history of the Nazi regime.

Any more than those speaking at Klan rallies are simplying arguing that affirmative action has gone too far.

[Predicto]

This is not the intent of the law or how it is prosecuted.

Those prosecuted for Holocaust Denial are not interested in an academic argument about the history of the Nazi regime.

Any more than those speaking at Klan rallies are simplying arguing that affirmative action has gone too far.

This is exactly the argument that the Chinese Government makes about Falun Gong. The ideas are too dangerous.

[Sisyphus]

This is exactly the argument that the Chinese Government makes about Falun Gong. The ideas are too dangerous.

So what? You're comparing Falun Gong to Nazism? Where are the 6 million dead bodies from Falun Gong?

Or the Chinese Govermnet to the modern German democracy?

[JMS]

This is not the intent of the law or how it is prosecuted.

Those prosecuted for Holocaust Denial are not interested in an academic argument about the history of the Nazi regime. Any more than those speaking at Klan rallies are simplying arguing that affirmative action has gone too far.

It's nice of you to paraphrase their argument for me. I think to fully understanding their arguement requires that they be allowed to present their own argument. Only by fully understanding are they defined and exposed.

The Klan can march through the streets of down town DC and present there concepts of racial purity on the steps of the Lincoln memorial. In the US the Nazi's can and have marched right along with the Klan. You think those public demonstrations have helped or hurt their overall apeal in the United States? You think their are more Nazi sympethizers today in the US, who protects their right to speak; or Germany who outlaws it?

It doesn't matter what you think. It doesn't matter what the offensive thinker's credentials are. It matters what people who are observing them think. Is it reasonable someone not knowledgeable about who the Nazi's were could be confused when a person's book signing is interupted by the thought police? That they themselves are not allowed to debate or explore the writings of oponents to the party line supported by the government. Even if sereous historicans know the author is a hack.

[Predicto]

So what? You're comparing Falun Gong to Nazism? Where are the 6 million dead bodies from Falun Gong?

Or the Chinese Govermnet to the modern German democracy?

I am comparing the two government's justifications for limiting speech based solely on the content of the speech, and finding them equally wanting.

[Sisyphus]

You're wrong here. Whatever you think the intention is, the implementation is exactly as you describe. Jailing people for writting books. Jailing people at book signings. Jailing people in the middle of giving speaches.

I won't say that the jailed are scholars in anything but the loosest sense of the word. But they are non violent people putting forth offensive objectionable non violent thought..

You go ahead an write an essay or a book denying the Holocaust and you know you will not be prosecuted under German law.

The people who are prosecuted do not JUST publish a book. Over a sustained period of many years they engage in activities such as mass-mailing ing their incendiary writings, they speak regularly at fascist and neo-Nazi conventions, they campaign in favor of the neo-Nazi agenda and agitate their audience to redress the imaginary wrongs they have suffered. The intent of their actions is crystal clear - it is not about debating history.

Given how the Europeans have suffered at the hands of facists some countries have decided that such actions are a threat to peace and should be criminalized. Prosecuting such actions is not about academic freedom; it is about preventing intimidation, incitement to violence against minorities, and undermining democracy. While I am a strong advocate of free speech, I think the law and its practice are the right approach given history.

[@DCGoldPants]

I've been to the Holocaust Mueseum here in D.C., and the Muesum of Jewish History in Berlin. As disturbing as the one in D.C. is, the stuff in the Berlin one blows it away. They are going way to the extreme to acknowledge their past here.

[headexplode]

So what? You're comparing Falun Gong to Nazism? Where are the 6 million dead bodies from Falun Gong?

Or the Chinese Govermnet to the modern German democracy?

For one thing, there were many more than six million bodies in the wake of Nazism--let's not forget the millions of handicapped, homosexuals, christians, gypsies, russians and whoever else that were ruthlessly slaughtered.

Inciting violence against a people and denying the holocaust happened are two different things. There are people in this country that deny slavery happened. We don't lock them up, we tell them in no uncertain terms that, I'm sorry, you are retarded and ridiculous and we banish them to the backwoods of Montana or Texas or Tennessee or any other of the heartland states. But if they say, let's rise up and kill well then I can see your point. Otherwise, I think it's more dangerous to try to ignore them and hide them than to simply refute their points so all can see what delusional douches they are.

[Sisyphus]

I am comparing the two government's justifications for limiting speech based solely on the content of the speech, and finding them equally wanting.

The intent of Holocaust deniers is to convince neo-Nazis and fascists that history has lied to them and that they are being punished by the Jews and otehrs for something that never happened to them. This directly leads to acts of violence.

If Falun Gong are willfully lying with the intent of someone being enabled to commit a violent act, then the two are comparable.

[JMS]

You go ahead an write an essay or a book denying the Holocaust and you know you will not be prosecuted under German law..

I certainly would be arrested If I published the book in Germany. If I carried the book into Germany, If I was caught selling the book in Germany. Thats because in Germany it is against the law to deny the holocost. Against the law to do so in speach, or in print. They arrest folks for doing so in Germany.

Not folks who do so proximal to a crime. Just folks who do it at all. That's what we're talking about.

[JMS]

You go ahead an write an essay or a book denying the Holocaust and you know you will not be prosecuted under German law.

The people who are prosecuted do not JUST publish a book. Over a sustained period of many years they engage in activities such as mass-mailing ing their incendiary writings, they speak regularly at fascist and neo-Nazi conventions, they campaign in favor of the neo-Nazi agenda and agitate their audience to redress the imaginary wrongs they have suffered. The intent of their actions is crystal clear - it is not about debating history.

Given how the Europeans have suffered at the hands of facists some countries have decided that such actions are a threat to peace and should be criminalized. Prosecuting such actions is not about academic freedom; it is about preventing intimidation, incitement to violence against minorities, and undermining democracy. While I am a strong advocate of free speech, I think the law and its practice are the right approach given history.

Oh the German law doesn't just inprison people who express an idea, but people who express that idea consistantly, professionally, and authoritatively over an extended period of time. Those are the people we have to silence?

Those are exactly the kind of people we want to keep talking!

[JMS]

I've been to the Holocaust Mueseum here in D.C., and the Muesum of Jewish History in Berlin. As disturbing as the one in D.C. is, the stuff in the Berlin one blows it away. They are going way to the extreme to acknowledge their past here.

One side of it anyway...